Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar
There's no ambiguity. The text is crystal clear. The children of idolatrous fathers who were punished were God-haters in the first place. The statement is clearly qualified, most especially since they are contrasted with the second group who God loves. This narrative is a great example of the doctrine of reprobation that is taught in Rom 1:18ff. It's no accident in this Romans passage that is said of those reprobates that they, too, were idolalters; for they worshiped the creation rather than the Creator!
|
You are being ambiguous. No it is not qualified. 10 does not alter 9 in any way. We still have "visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children....
9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me
10 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.
....................................
this is the qualifier......
"the third and fourth generation of them that hate me"
So the children were punished because their fathers were god haters. God is not saying further generations are god haters and he's gonna punish them
because they hate him, but simply because their father's hated him.
Reprobation of the idolator fathers grand-kids.
So the sins are passed down from the fathers for 4 or 5 generations to unborn yet to be god haters?
I was simply telling you that was a bit ambiguous. Giving your version of god a break. But hey, thanks for confirming your Yahweh was as bad a child hating infant killing deity as I suspected.
